Core: Connected to #1434: run all only tests

[ventuno]

WIP alternate implementation of #1434: modifying the way only behaves instead of adding a new method.

TODO:

• docs;

[trentmwillis]

Thanks for implementing this approach as well! @qunitjs/core any of you have thoughts on this approach over #1435?

[ventuno]

Thanks @trentmwillis, let me know which approach is preferred and I'll complete this by adding docs :-).

[smcclure15]

I'm in favor of this "running all only's" behavior. The new logic is clear ("run only these!"), where the current algorithm was a little fuzzy on which on won. The "run some" approach with a different API has a lot of behavioral overlap (two ways of doing the same thing). It helps close this gap, but introduces more fuzziness with it.

I don't think this change should be cause for a major semver bump, just a minor.

[Krinkle]

Thanks for implementing this approach as well! @qunitjs/core any of you have thoughts on this approach over #1435?

I'm +1 on improving module.only over introducing another method. To me this is a "Do what I mean" kind of thing where I see no harm from letting multiple run, if the flag is applied to module test suites.

As I understand it, its design was limited to one as a way to to avoid mistakes, not per se because it would be undesirable to support multiple.

I do note that if we change this behaviour, the docs should be updated as well. In particular, at https://api.qunitjs.com/QUnit/only it currently says:

Note that if more than one QUnit.only call is present, only the first instance will run.

[ventuno]

Thanks @Krinkle, as we seem to be leaning towards changing only's approach I just pushed related doc changes. Please let me know if that looks good :-).

[trentmwillis]

Overall, this looks great! A few small suggestions for the documentation and one question about the actual implementation: does this handle nested modules properly? For example, if you had:

module.only('One', () => {});
module.only('Two', () => {
  module('A', () => {});
});

Would module A run?

I'm pretty sure the following would work:

module.only('One', () => {
  module('A', () => {});
});

But I think if a module.only is followed by another module.only with the second one having nested modules, then the nested modules won't run (even though I think a user would expect them to).

[ventuno]

But I think if a module.only is followed by another module.only with the second one having nested modules, then the nested modules won't run (even though I think a user would expect them to).

Thanks @trentmwillis, I agree that modules nested inside a module.only should run as well. Thanks for catching this. I addressed (and tested) this, let me know if my solution looks good: I'm looking at the list of parent modules and if any is in the queue then I assume this module should run as well.

[trentmwillis]

Looks good to me! Thank you! I'll probably release a new version this weekend.

[ventuno]

Thanks @trentmwillis. Looking forward to it :-).

[trentmwillis]

Released in v2.10.0!

[ventuno]

Thanks!